Criminal proceedings against an accused may be quashed under Section 528 BNSS where the FIR against principal offenders has already been quashed due to a compromise, rendering the prosecution's case against the remaining accused weak and the continuation of trial a futile exercise causing unnecessary harassment.

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Petitioner herein, who is Doctor by profession and has been made accused in FIR No.55 of 2024, dated 06.05.2024, registered at Police Station Janjehali, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, under Section 376 of IPC, Sections 6, 17 and 21 of the POCSO Act, and Sections 9 and 10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , for quashing of FIR on the ground that she has been falsely implicated, because she had no information that minor brought before her for medical examination is victim of offence committed under Sections 6 and 17 of the POCSO Act.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties are that FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings came to be lodged at the behest of Dr. Uday Bhanu, Medical Officer, Mandav Hospital, Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, who alleged that on 06.05.2024 at 05:40 pm, victim-prosecutrix, aged 17 years, (name withheld to protect the identity) was brought for delivery of child. Victim-prosecutrix delivered a child, but since at the time of delivery, her age was less than 18 years, matter came to be reported to the Police, which subsequently, on the basis of statement of victim-prosecutrix, recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., lodged FIR against persons namely Kundan Lal, Dinu Ram, Valmu Devi, Ganga Ram, Dhali Devi, Dr. Pushpinder, Genita Devi, Gumti Devi, Kaura Devi and Dr. Deicheen Aangmo.

3. Since it came to be transpired during investigation that petitioner herein, who at relevant time was posted as Medical Officer at CH Thunag, had examined victim-prosecutrix before her delivery, but yet she failed to report the matter to the Police, case under Section 21 of the POCSO Act also came to be registered against her.

4. Though after completion of investigation, Police has already presented Challan in the competent Court of law, but before same could be taken to its logical ends, accused namely Kundan Lal, Dinu Ram, Valmu Devi, Ganga Ram and Dhali Devi approached this Court by way of Cr.MMO No.975 of 2025 filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise. Coordinate Bench of this Court, while taking note of statement made by victim-prosecutrix, coupled with the fact that marriage inter se victim-prosecutrix and main accused Kundan Lal stood solemnised and out of their wedlock, one child has born, proceeded to quash the FIR against the petitioners, named in the FIR, in afore petition.

5. Mr. K.S. Thakur, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner, duly assisted by Mr. Vivek Negi, Advocate, while referring to afore judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vehemently argued that when FIR against the principal offenders qua the offences allegedly committed by them under Section 376 of IPC, read with Sections 6, 17 and 21 of POCSO Act and Sections 9 and 10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, stands quashed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court while exercising power under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , prayer made on behalf of the petitioner in the case at hand for quashing of FIR also deserves to be allowed.

6. Having carefully perused judgment dated 12.03.2026 rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.MMO No.975 of 2025, this Court finds merit in the contention of learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner. Factum with regard to quashing of FIR against the principal offenders is fairly admitted